Not so fast, Doug, you are a sneaking devil
, why not post the whole thought of Murray? "It is quite impossible to construe this emphasis upon the one sin of the one man as equivalent to the actual personal sin of countless individuals. It is indisputable, therefore, that Paul regards the universality of condemnation and death as grounded upon and proceeding from the one trespass of the one-man Adam. And the Pelagian insistence that death and condemnation find their ground solely in the personal voluntary sin of the individuals of the human race cannot be harmonized with this sustain witness of the Apostle Paul."
Talk about creating a strawman to fight against. Now, you believe that Condemnation & Death fell upon the human race through their personal sins. But
Adam and Eve had not conceived a
child before their act of sin. Therefore, God's judgment passed to all through Man-One & One-Sin! This is Paul's affirmation and why your view is Pelagian. Romans 5:15-19 is a refutation of the Pelagian view and is explicit and undeniable.
So, you agree that we are imputed with Adam's sin & guilt? Or is comprehensive a politician's term?
Merry Christmas, LA,
1) My limited quote is not an attempt to circumvent anything or cherry pick something that seems to support me. That said, the larger quote doesn't change the point of my quotation. Murray says that only Adam, the individual man, sinned, not the rest of us, thus he wrote, "It is quite impossible to construe this emphasis upon the one sin of the one man as equivalent to the actual personal sin of countless individuals." That this is "indisputable" is why Paul writes that of the consequences of sin upon "the many", are solely because of the sinful act of "one man"-- not many within one man, but "one" individual, solitary male person!
Pelagian theology denies that we are not born depraved, that we are born perfect as Adam was in the beginning, and every baby has the potential of not necessarily sinning. I do not hold to this in any way. We are born totally depraved, before we can do any good or bad! As you've cited, I was "born in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me" (Psalm 51:5), and this means that we are naturally unholy before God, even before we actually sin as individuals, which leads to my next point;
2) The dynamic between God and man has multiple aspects to its whole. When we filter everything through just one aspect, it becomes a one dimensional paper doll cutout argument. This is what I see you doing.
You are basing your argument on a purely legal plane of argument. You ask "But why Doug if they personally did not sin? Why did God punish the innocent in your view? Only the guilty can be punished, correct, according to you, and Tom." This is a legal approach to the issue, and in itself, is a correct question to ask, but it is not just a legal issue, it is also a relational issue. We are separated from God's presence and family (the majority of the gospel is built on a relational plane of understanding: Father, Son, children of God, brothers and sisters etc) and are not under his authority personally. You and I are not born as a member of the "family" of God, then then you are still condemned and doomed, even before you actually sin.
If a baby dies, for example, it hasn't sinned, but aside from the grace of God, it is not a member of the family of God. This is why I used a spiritual "genetics" analogy; humans are not spiritually born with the family genes, and thus, not characteristics of the family line. We won't grow up to look like Jesus because our spiritual genetics have been corrupted by sin, and created, if you will, another species of being that is incompatible with God.
If we are then born into a relational separation, and the "genetics" of our being are contrary to the nature of God, then we are an enemy before we ever actually sin, and are condemned just the same as if we had actually sinned against God. Thus, we do not have to be "guilty" of sinful acts to be condemned to death. That is precisely why "death reigned from Adam to Moses", even though there was no law by which to adjudicate guilt.
It's a judgment of a curse, condemnation & separation issue.
But why Doug if they personally did not sin? Why did God punish the innocent in your view? Only the guilty can be punished, correct, according to you, and Tom.
I beg to differ, because Adam is our representative as is Christ for believers. This is the point you either avoid or just can't see. Paul's affirmation of the parallel between the two Adam's and their One Act is explicit to our solidarity or union with either Adam. In other words, we are either in the first Adam or the Last Adam, there's no, in between. Sorry Doug, but you're way off on this one. Why hold to a Pelagian view on this point is beyond me.
Psalm 51:
1Have mercy on me, O God,
according to your steadfast love;
according to your abundant mercy
blot out my transgressions.
2Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity,
and cleanse me from my sin!
3For I know my transgressions,
and my sin is ever before me.
4Against you, you only, have I sinned
and done what is evil in your sight,
so that you may be justified in your words
and blameless in your judgment.
5Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity,
and in sin did my mother conceive me.
6Behold, you delight in truth in the inward being,
and you teach me wisdom in the secret heart.
May the peace proclaimed by the heavenly hosts
to shepherds outside of Bethlehem's keep
be yours in abundance, above that of most
and may pillows of Grace guard your sleep!
And when you arise to find Christmas morn
has dawned in all its splendid array
remember it's only because Christ was born
that any could smile and joyfully say
Merry Christmas!
Doug